The extent to which Debbie Thurman was involved in the effort to deny Janet Jenkins her legal parental rights is more extensive than might have been guessed. Thurman has often portrayed herself as someone who knows Lisa Miller but who is objective. But the further into the story we get, the more Debbie’s hand is seen.

We knew that she was the spokesperson for the Protect Isabella site and now it appears that she is the administrator of the Facebook page entitled as “Only One Mommy: The Story of Lisa and Isabella Miller“. After having shut down her own website and that of the Formers, Debbie has reported a technical glitch is making it difficult to shut down discussion on that page as well.

It is difficult to determine Debbie’s intentions, but it seems that she is in the process of eliminating at least part of the public history of the discussion about Lisa’s efforts to deny Janet visitation – especially that which displays the words of Lisa’ supporters. I will not speculate on the reason why. Debbie may feel that the discussion is becoming confrontational and unneccessarily angry or maybe she’s embarrassed by the unbridled hatred that some of Lisa’s supporters are spewing.

Or maybe she has other purposes. I do not know.

But it does appear that Debbie – according to the Facebook page – may be the last person who publicly reported any contact with Lisa. The anti-gay LifeSiteNews reports

Miller’s last public communication was posted on her Facebook page December 4 by a supporter.

This supporter was, not suprisingly, Debbie Thurman, who posted the following:

A Note from Lisa
I just wanted to thank all of you for your kind and encouraging words. Please know that I cherish your hopefulness, Bible verses/stories and words of praise for our God that you share with me via this forum. I also want to let you know that due to saving money I am no…t renewing my internet services. However, I will check FB periodically because when I do get on I am immediately encouraged by your faithfulness to our God by how you continue to praise Him –even through this “dark” ruling. Thank You. Please do continue to praise God “who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is work within us, to him be the glory” (Ephesians 3:20-21). Remember, “He will do only as much for us as we allow Him to do in us” (The Alliance). This reminds me of the widow\’s oil and Nahum washing in the river- if they did not believe 100% then they would not have been the recipient of our Father\’s miracles. Furthermore, also please remember that the widow would have received as much oil as the number of her containers- in other words, more faith- more oil. I have been in prayer and Bible study over the matter of late and I believe that God is not finished. God is the God of the impossible: “Nothing is impossible with God” (Luke 1:37). “Therefore, may we continue to persevere, for even if we took our circumstances and cast all darkness of human doubt upon them and then hastily piled as many difficulties together as we could find against God\’s divine word, we could never move beyond the blessedness of His miracle – working power. May we place our faith completely in Him, for He is the God of the impossible” (Streams in the Desert). Are we not here in my legal case? I choose to wait patiently on Him (Daniel 12:12) and continue to stand on His promise (for both Isabella and me) that “no weapon formed against thee shall prosper” (Isaiah 54:17). Let us continue to go forward in faith as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Rahab, Daniel, Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David and others who went forward (Hebrews 11). “And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief” (Matthew 13:58). Thank you again friends in Christ for “standing in the gap for Isabella and me.” “The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority. And my people love it so! But what will you do at the end of it?” (Jeremiah 5:31)

It is quite possible that Debbie Thurman is not the last person with public knowledge about Lisa’s whereabouts. It would not be surprising if Lias had communication with her legal counsel after she and Debbie arranged for this message to be posted.

It is early in this investigation and many more sources may become available. But at least the police do have a starting spot if they choose to vigorously pursue this parental abduction.

UPDATE: 4/27/11

Debbie Thurman has provided us with the following response:

Do you think this has not been looked into by “the authorities”? It has.
They are the only ones who needed to hear from me on it. It was properly
dismissed last year as insignificant.

Yesterday when I noticed The Formers blog went ‘dead’ I searched out the Google caches of her posts. From what I read I couldn’t see anything ‘nefarious.’ Though there were a few earlier posts that were not cached.

And the point wasn’t that he was gung-ho for cutting babies – it was that the real mother would never consent to having the baby cut in half.

Remember, that from her perspective, she’s doing the only noble thing she can do – running away with her child to escape the clutches of the vile, twisted Gay AgendaÂ®. If any one of us had been ordered to turn over our child to a hardore super-Nazi who had publicly sworn to immediately disembowel the child, we’d try to run away too.

Now, it seems ludicrous to any of us to compare Nazis to gays, but then, there you have it. She’s not acting out of greed, or being purposely contentious – she’s acting on a real motherly impulse to protect her child. Her actions may be reprehensible, given that they stem from hateful and false conclusions, but the motivation behind it isn’t entirely evil – it’s just a twisted form of good.

And the point wasnâ€™t that he was gung-ho for cutting babies â€“ it was that the real mother would never consent to having the baby cut in half.”

Cory, oh I know, I was making the point that Jesus never said to make off with the baby. He never said to cowardly run away from the issue — which is what Miller has done. Rather than be truly brave and stand and face the music, she has run off.

Think about this. Does Miller have extended family? People who could be Grandma, Grandpa, Uncle, Aunt, Cousin, etc, etc to little Isabella? A great deal of what we do leaves a digital footprint. So Miller would have to go completely off the grid. No credit cards, no cell phones, no bills in her name. She’s also going to have to avoid communicating with anyone at all as her family is most likely going to be watched for signs they’ve been communicating with her. If anyone discovers either of their identities, they have to run, and run, and run, and run. A life on the run is what she’s decided is much better for Isabella. And why? Because Miller wants to pretend everything from her “former homosexual” years never happened. Well, now she has to give up everything for her selfishness. All to protect Isabella from what? There’s no proof of abuse. Miller is acting irresponsibly, irrationally, and the only thing I can think of is that she really, desperately, absolutely, wants to hurt Janet.

“Remember, that from her perspective, sheâ€™s doing the only noble thing she can do â€“ running away with her child to escape the clutches of the vile, twisted Gay AgendaÂ®. If any one of us had been ordered to turn over our child to a hardore super-Nazi who had publicly sworn to immediately disembowel the child, weâ€™d try to run away too.”

That’s the thing though, Jenkins has made no such declarations. She just wants to see her daughter, that’s all she’s ever wanted.

“Now, it seems ludicrous to any of us to compare Nazis to gays, but then, there you have it. Sheâ€™s not acting out of greed, or being purposely contentious â€“ sheâ€™s acting on a real motherly impulse to protect her child. Her actions may be reprehensible, given that they stem from hateful and false conclusions, but the motivation behind it isnâ€™t entirely evil â€“ itâ€™s just a twisted form of good.”

That’s why they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

No one out there, no villian on this earth ever truly thinks of him or herself as evil. Not really. Hell, half the serial killers out there think God has charged them with getting rid of the wicked. Speaking of Nazis, I’m sure Hitler thought he was doing the right thing. Just as the folks who drowned all those poor women for “Witchcraft” thought they were doing the right thing, too. Just as the folks in Uganda who want us killed for “excessive homosexuality” think they’re doing the right thing, too.

Somehow Thurman’s destruction of her web site reminds me of the Archbishop of Wisconsin’s practice of shredding of reports of molestation and/or sexual abuse by clergy in that diocese. He wanted to hide the evidence. Is Thurman?

But in this case, Lisa knows Janet personally, lived with her, had a relationship with her, and formed a civil union with her. So she can’t possibly believe that Janet is the equivalent of a super Nazi. This affair is not the product of a misunderstanding or an incorrect premise innocently held.

Well, that’s obviously not true…. what she chose to do wasn’t to “wait patiently” on God, but to kidnap a child in an effort to avoid a court ruling that she doesn’t like.

We just had a case in Miami where the biological mother of a child kidnapped the kid and ran off in an effort to keep from giving up custody. She was found in about 2 days and is sitting in jail, refusing to tell anyone where her 8-month old baby is.

I suspect that this ugly custody case is actually motivated by the same emotion that motivates most other ugly custody cases: hate. Not the hate of gay people, or those who don’t have an evangelical view of the world. I supect this is all due to hatred of Janet Jenkins.

Lisa Miller plays to the anti-gay crowd for support, but I am not so sure that her actions would be any different if Janet Jenkins were a man.

Any excuse, any delaying tactic, going on the run, etc. She has used this child for years as a pawn in a game with only one aim: hurt Janet Jenkins by denying her any chance to see this kid. The kid is the only weapon that she still has to hurt Janet Jenkins, so she continues to weild it.

I have argued all along that this is a simple custody case, regardless of how ugly it has become. And to Judge Cohen’s credit, he continues to treat the case as such. This case probably isn’t just a typical custody case on the legal level; it is probably just another typical ugly custody case on the emotional level as well. Lisa Miller is likely playing everyone in order to satisfy her need to hurt Janet Miller.

And nobody is being played more than Debbie Thurman. Depending on her actions, Debbie could be in danger of being played right into a prison cell.

Based upon Timothy’s quoted piece attributed to Lisa Miller, I would consider her to be an unfit mother. One would have to assume that Isabella is being indoctrinated with the same tragic level of religious fanaticism evident in Lisa’s writing. If that indoctrination sticks, it is likely that Isabella’s future productive potential will be seriously diminished.

When I look at religious fanatics, I see people rejecting productive pursuits in favor of wasting their lives reading the bible and religious tracts in lieu of anything else, obsessively praising a deity, condemning science while promoting superstition, persecuting people different than themselves, splitting hairs on theological doctrine, writing inane comments on the American Family Association’s ONN website, and being perpetually terrified that some small infraction will cause their barbaric vindictive, albeit loving, deity to condemn them to burn for all eternity.

When I look at everyone else I see among them people rejecting superstition in favor of inquiring, discovering, and learning about the natural world. And then I see them teaching, inventing, developing, and producing strategies, methods, programs, and products that make human life far superior today than it was thousands of years ago when superstition was all anyone could imagine.

When I read Lisa Miller’s last public comment I can’t help but notice how similar it sounds to the rantings of radical Islamists in their pre suicide bombing manifestos.

I know that sounds over the top but I’m being dead serious.

Go back and read it and replace God with Allah and Jesus with Mohamed and see if it doesn’t sound like the radical religiounist rantings that conservatives and fundamentalist Christians hate and fear so much when coming from Muslims.

It also has the same self-righteousness and claims of persecution that come with EVERY suicide bomber’s pre-bombing video that I’ve ever seen on CNN.

The similarities are frightening. And yes Cory I agree with your analysis of the situation but it doesn’t make it any less frightening just because it’s sincere.

I just happen to have the comments from Thurman’s last blog, with exception of the first comment which was mine. Someone yelled rudely but nothing out of the ordinary flame wars. Note, Debbie’s username is TheFormers.

theformers said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

OK, letâ€™s try this: I honestly do not know if Lisa is right in doing what she has done. I am willing to leave it in Godâ€™s hands. I support her, the person. I am not unequivocally saying I believe she is engaging in justified civil disobedience. But I acknowledge that she believes she is and that she has not acted without a lot of careful thought and prayer. Thatâ€™s as clear as this is going to get.

Lindoro Almaviva added a new comment to the post Some Needed Clarification.

Lindoro Almaviva said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

Why, because I am calling you out? because I am giving you exactly what you have given gay people and now you have someone who will not be bullied by you? Because I was not afraid of your bullying tactics and threats of â€œlibel suitsâ€? Because i have said ity and will continue saying that I believe you are aiding and abetting a felon?

Lindoro Almaviva added a new comment to the post Some Needed Clarification.

Lindoro Almaviva said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

How does it feel to be the object of attacks this time? how does it feel to be the punching bag this time? See? i am not the one claiming to be a â€œCristianâ€. I am not the one claiming to be a victim of the system. How does it feel to be on the receiving end of what you have been all too happy to dish for some time now? You think it hurts me?

I am not the one claiming purity here. I am not the one claiming that God spoke to me and that I am supposed to celebrate the committing of a felony and the destruction of a family based on some interpretation of a bible verse that didnâ€™t even come from Jesus himself? What I hope is that you do see the just rewards of your actions; because if God does exist, He would do no better than give you exactly what you deserve for doing this..

thomasthefree added a new comment to the post Some Needed Clarification.

thomasthefree said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

Debbie,

I think your clarification is very clear, as were your original sentiments, which were your own and certain nothing illegal to express. Youâ€™ve gone the extra mile to clarify . . . and still you are attacked. Obviously, there are some people who have jumped on an opportunity to try to discredit you. That they do so in such an uncivil manner clarifies their intent. Theyâ€™s using this situation. This is indeed a heartbreaking case. The young girl should not have ever been subjected to this. The true parent in this case should not have to spend years seeking justice. Iâ€™m praying, as you requested, that Godâ€™s will be done and that human interference, particularly by those who selfishly want to profit from these tragedies to further their personal persuasions, be stilled. Families are not composed of partners. Families are composed of a man and a woman who marry and commit themselves to each other and in many cases, to raising children. Families do fail and laws are designed to deal with that. However, this is not really a family in Godâ€™s eyes and it is no surprise that it has become so twisted. Iâ€™m praying for all involved, as well as those who are attacking you for your concern.

eulogos1 said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

There was no family. Two women and a baby that one of them had is not a family.

Not knowing any more about the situation, I will say that letting Janet have visitation might have been the lesser of several evils. Mothers often have to let their children have visitation with men they think arenâ€™t very good for their children. If Janet would agree not to discuss homosexuality with the child and not to speak against her Christian beliefs, and if she wouldnâ€™t share a bed with another woman or engage in displays of sexual affection with a woman in front of the child, ( and yes I do mean the kinds of kisses and hugs which are acceptable for a married couple to engage in in front of a child) then it might have been a bearable situation. But perhaps she would not agree to this. In which case I see why Lisa was very reluctant.

Whether letting a child be exposed to open homosexuality is a greater evil, or having to live in hiding the rest of her life, plus the risk that they may be caught and she may be ripped from her mother is the greater, only LIsa can say.

Sometimes the law is wrong. I do support her in disobeying it if she believes it is what is right for her child. And no, I donâ€™t have much respect for the family court system, and even less so in this case. If I knew where she was (and I donâ€™t even know her and have never met her) I would never tell, and I would assist her if I were able.

But I think she is taking a terrible risk and I am frightened for her.
Susan Peterson

hazemyth said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

Whatever oneâ€™s sympathies, the term â€˜civil disobedienceâ€™ does not apply. Protestors, in acts of civil disobedience, break the law but submit to arrest â€” they do not flee it. This is both commonly accepted and explicitly stated by leaders in itâ€™s development, such as Mahatma Gandhi.

Further, people who commit civil disobedience do so for no immediate gain. It is a form of protest regarding public policy. They are disinterested in the outcome of the specific transgressions they commit. Any gain is to be found in changing the policy. Criminal transgressions that serve immediate outcomes or personal gain are not regarded as forms of civil disobedience, though their may perpetrators consider them matters of justice.

It seems likely that Lisa Miller has gone to ground, if she indeed has, in order to retain custody of her child. She may feel this is best for the child. She may feel that the law, in general or as applied to her, is unjust. However, she has a personal and immediate stake in her actions. It is not an act of civil disobedience.

theformers said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

I have no response for Lindoro, who I have decided to let hang around a bit as long as the language is decent.

This is for Hazemyth, who raises the point that what Lisa appears to have done is not actually civil disobedience because she is not submitting herself at this time for arrest or some other consequences of her refusal to comply with policies or court rulings and she has only self-serving motives. Did I get that right?

While I plan on doing a bit of research on civil disobedience and will comment further on this, I will only point out now that Lisa presented herself for punishment in the form of contempt of court fines for years. She clearly was punished in the court of public opinion, something I have a bit of personal experience with. And as to the whole policy-change motive of civil disobedience, well, sheâ€™s got that one covered, too. Clearly, she has not only sought to protect the welfare of her daughter and maintain her parental authority, but also has hoped her own travails with this case would have an impact on how marriage is viewed socially, politically and spiritually in the future.

It is pretty ironic that a woman who has no husband (maybe that could change down the road), who chose â€” against what God would have wanted â€” to use artificial insemination to bring a child into the world in a lesbian household, without being able to see farther down the road to the fallout, would now be in a position to impact social and marriage mores with a precedent-setting legal case? Do you really think Lisa Miller has not been able to grasps the significance of all this? Sheâ€™s not that naive.

Lisa is not representing an oppressed people in the same sense that Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights protesters were. They had strength in numbers and large extended families for support. In a sense, she is representing all those who are formers or ex/post-gays. But even that is not her main cause, I think. I see that more as motherhood and marriage.

Lisa is walking this road essentially alone as the mother who has to be there to raise her child. Alone yet not alone. Her extended family, beyond her dad and brother, has been the many compassionate and forgiving Christian friends who found they could not help but love her and Isabella, despite their crazy circumstances. They/we saw a woman who was contrite, having come to her senses from her former sinful life and wanted only to do the right thing and to be a blessing to others. But she had to extricate herself from this tangled web before having the full freedom to go on with life. With two states battling tooth and nail over her personal life and future and no end in sight, how could she?

Itâ€™s easy for us to sit back as armchair quarterbacks, not getting bruised and banged up in the game, and spout all our pontifications about what she should or shouldnâ€™t have done. We have not walked a day in her shoes. I have watched her allow God to build her up under the most excruciating circumstances, and in that, she has been a marvelous inspiration to me. Is she perfect? No. She has feel of clay the same as I do. We will just have to wait and see what God will accomplish through this struggle. And make no mistake, He is in it.

theformers said on Some Needed Clarification
December 31, 2009 at 9:40 am

I am including some points raised in an analysis of civil disobedience by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/civil-disobedience). It includes some familiar names, such as John Rawls, Henry David Thoreau and John Stuart Mill.

For example:

â€œThe controllers of mainstream media tend to give defenders of unpopular views limited space to make their case. Given the sensational news value of illegal methods, however, engaging in civil disobedience often leads to wide dissemination of a position (Russell, 1998, 635). John Stuart Mill observes, with regard to dissent in general, that sometimes the only way to make a view heard is to allow, or even to invite, society to ridicule and sensationalise it as intemperate and irrational (Mill, 1999). Admittedly, the success of this strategy depends partly upon the character of the society in which it is employed; but it should not be ruled out as a strategy for communication.â€

Given the poor handling of the Miller v. Jenkins case by the MSM and the even more scant and misunderstood views of ex-gays, might this be a valid justification for Lisaâ€™s actions, whatever we call them?

And this:

â€œConscientious Objection: This kind of protest may be understood as a violation of the law motivated by the dissenterâ€™s belief that she is morally prohibited to follow the law because the law is either bad or wrong, totally or in part.â€

As to possible justification for civil disobedience:

â€œJustified civil disobedience, says Rawls, can serve to inhibit departures from justice and to correct departures when they occur; thus it can act as a stabilising force in society (Rawls, 1971, 383)â€

Christian apologist Francis Schaeffer said in his little book, â€œA Christian Manifestoâ€: â€œIf there is no final place for civil disobedience, then the government has been made autonomous, and as such, it has been put in place of the Living God.â€

Christian blogger Michael Keating observed in a review of Schaefferâ€™s book, â€œFor example in current affairs it would be one thing for the government to force a Christian to have an abortion and another thing to force the State of Georgia to violate its own constitution in some way. This is the basic argument he extends to the colonial fight for independence, namely that England was trying to force unjust laws on the colonies as entities. In such cases, individuals who organize under lesser authorities (for example the Governor of Georgia) have the right and in many cases the duty to resist.â€

It would be hard to miss the parallel here between Vermontâ€™s and Virginiaâ€™s squaring off over the definition of marriage and the statesâ€™ opposing laws recognizing what is and isnâ€™t marriage.

There is no federal marriage law or Constitutional amendment, so this case is the first one to seek a de facto government statement on such, should it wind up being decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. Perhaps Lisa determined that the only way to get there, given the failure of Congress to act in light of the clear need for such national consensus, is through the courts with the added impetus of an act of civil disobedience.

All your protestation and claims to know nothing wreak of lies. Your so called â€œperspectiveâ€ is not more than gloating over a mother living the worst nightmare a mother could live. Your protestation of knowing nothing wreak of hidden truths and saving face.

Scream all you want, protest all you want. There are people who see through that.

and where exactly is our favorite ex lesbian duo with the beautiful child they use as a political tool? Costa Rica? Venezuela?
Where is jib jab when ya need a good video titled
WHERE IN THE WORLD IS THE EX-LESBIAN SUPER DUO…?
out to save the world from gay families everywhere…except maybe their own? Does Debbies hubby know where she is?

Lisa gave birth and raised the kid. Janet contributed nothing and was bankrolled by the ACLU and Lambda. Mothers are not just breeders from whom the people with money and agendas can just walk off with the kids. Handmaid’s Tale anyone?

Timothy, your timeline doesn’t quite line up with the following from the FBI:

f. In or about January 2001, Jenkins and Miller identified an alternative insemination specialist in Virginia for the purpose of pursuing a pregnancy of Miller. Jenkins paid approximately fifty thousand dollars to facilitate the alternative insemination that led to the birth of IMJ on April 16, 2002. . .

In or about August 2003, Jenkins told Miller that she wanted a separation due to her concerns over Miller’s behavior and refusal to seek help. Jenkins hoped that the separation would encourage Miller to seek help.

d. In September 2003, Miller and IMJ moved to Virginia. During that Fall, Jenkins traveled to Virginia regularly on weekends to visit IMJ.

C. Litigation Prior to 2007
7. Miller filed a complaint for dissolution of the civil union in Rutland Family Court in November 2003.

8. On June 17, 2004, the Rutland Family Court issued a temporary order regarding
parental rights and responsibilities. This order awarded Lisa temporary legal and physical responsibility for IMJ and awarded Janet parent-child contact-for two weekends in June, one weekend in July, and the third full week of each month, beginning in August 2004. The Family Court also ordered Lisa to permit Janet to have telephone Contact with 1MJ once daily.

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.